Mandatory Calorie Counts
Options
Replies
-
Honestly, I think it will help. I have to get back on the wagon now (let myself slide for a while due to various reasons). I can't tell you how many times during that slide I would hit the nearest fast food place, having rushed out of the office because I needed a break. Didn't really have time to look up the food calories, and inevitably, the phone doesn't move as fast as a visual comparison in front of you. The times I went to the Panera with the calorie count on the board I made much better decisions then when I went to say, Taco Bell. Mostly because I would look at an item, see the calories, then think, "ok, you can make a better choice than that, keep looking down the menu". Not everyone will use this, not everyone will care, but I think it will be an eye opener for some folks and for others, help keep us in check when we "stray". Of course, less fillers and crud in our food would help tons, but baby steps!0
-
I like having the information - and it DOES impact my choices. But I'm also here, logging my food and workout out and generally avoiding McDonald's like the plague. I do not for a moment believe that the person in the drive thru will have an epiphany and order the grilled chicken salad instead of the Double Quarterpounder with large fries. It would be nice if those calorie counts would inform more choices - I just don't see it.0
-
I think the law is great. I don't know if we should worry about it effecting children though... would they be more prone to eating disorders? That might be a dumb question.
Actually, this isn't dumb at all, it is, in fact EXACTLY why I raised the question.0 -
It already happens here in Vermont.
It stopped me from picking up a cinnamon roll...I was looking for a little snack-type thing, saw the cinnamon roll, and thought it seemed like a good option....until I saw the calorie marker thing that said it had over 450 calories in the stupid roll. I opted for something else instead.
I think it can be very useful and helpful in a lot of places. The people that don't care, simply don't care...the people that do care have something to work with.0 -
We have this in Australia already - it is really annoying from one point of view as my hubbie gets so mad when we are travelling as I have no idea what I can have so I spend heaps of time staring at the numbers and end up having a coffee and garden salad or coke zero while he has whatever and then says I make him feel bad!0
-
I think its a great idea. It may be a little time consuming in the beginning but after the inital counts are calculated it would only be necessary to go through the whole process on menu additions. The public should be informed on what they are putting into their mouths. I have avoided small restaurants without nutrition information for quite a while and adding this may actually help business.0
-
I like it, I wish all restaurants had their calorie counts on their menus. I found on a road trip we took this past summer that it was easier for me to eat at fast food places because of the easy access to calorie information, than at a lot of nicer restaurants. Yes I can use my phone and look up similar items to what is on the menu, but it's just plain easier and faster when it's printed right there in front of you.0
-
It is good for those of us who care about such matters... There are some restaurants here in the US that don't post their nutrition guides... A local restaurant here in MS comes to mind that is only in MS and is the ONLY restaurant in many small towns that I would LOVE to see this information. available. That being said, there are many who will not pay it any mind.. Really. Also, there is a wide variety of ways these items are prepared from franchise to franchise so the information will only be good as a guide.
An example of what I am saying -- There is one restaurant here that if you buy a grilled chicken sandwich it is covered on BOTH sides with Mayo -- generously applied... Another restaurant, not so much... As we all know, there will be quite a difference in the real caloric content of the two burgers. This is why I don't get too caught up in the exact calorie measures -- whether at restaurants or at home.. It simply is not that accurate. Get close and don't sweat 200 cals either way...0 -
The more information given, the more informed a choice people are able to make. I'm all for it.0
-
I found on a road trip we took this past summer that it was easier for me to eat at fast food places because of the easy access to calorie information, than at a lot of nicer restaurants. Yes I can use my phone and look up similar items to what is on the menu, but it's just plain easier and faster when it's printed right there in front of you.
Yeah, I agree. It's counterintuitive, because the food at the nice restaurant is going to be fresher and higher quality ingredients, but you have no control over what the final calorie count is because you won't know how much olive oil or butter this particular chef used, whether it's 4 oz of meat or 5 oz, etc. The 'nice' thing about fast food is that it's all measured and prepared and cooked the same way each time, it's uniform. so, when you put down how many calories for a mcdonalds cheeseburger, it's going to be more accurate than an estimate from some other restaurant. so, even though the food isn't as good for you, I have feel like I have more control when I eat at fast food.0 -
I'm not sure if you're aware but we already have this law in New York State. I live in NYC and calories are every where I go.
As a public health professional and researcher with often controversial views (I don't support Bloomberg's big soda ban), I think this is a great way to move towards a healthier community. The reason is that it is NOT making decisions for anyone.. it does not take the choice away from you.
It's not just fast food. It's all places with multiple stores, including sit down restaurants. If I walk into the Pax downstairs, I can see that the giant cupcake is 600 calories.. and I won't buy it. I didn't used to see that. I can see that a sandwich is 500 calories and choose that instead (and eat 1/2 of eat with soup). But no one is forcing me to eat either one.. I've just gotten more information and for people who aren't tracking every calorie, this can at least help the be a little calorie conscious.
I have alot of issues with laws that prevent primarily poor/minority people from eating what they want .. for example, the soda ban primarily targets low income communities because they drink soda more. No one is banning 500 calorie $8 lattes with caramel and whipped cream from starbucks!!
But I think the calorie laws are great way to educate the public and make the layman a little more calorie aware about what they are actually putting into their bodies.
The natural next question is.. well if people can see the calories, do they know how much they should eat? In NYC, the public health department has paired the calorie labels with constant public health awareness campaigns, especially targeted at fast food. They'll say that the average person shouldn't eat more than 2000 calories a day, but the cheeseburger meal is 1000 calories.. Or it'll say something about children's calorie intake. They have a great one that shows that you have to walk from Yankee Stadium, in the Bronx, to Central Park to burn off the calories in a soda.
I don't know how effective these efforts have been, but research is starting to come out that shows that people are making smarter decisions with more information. It's a good first step.0 -
Why would anyone say this is a bad thing? I didn't know this was happening I think it is awesome! They should also have to list ALL ingredients.
ETA: What is the rationale that this would be a burden on business? They are in the business of selling food, they should not be above regulations. I would actually like to go a step further and make this a national requirement for ALL restaurants (not just corporate chains). If you are selling something meant for human consumption you should be required to list all ingredients and nutritional information even if you are a "mom and pop" shop in backwater east-nowhere. Why should anyone be exempt, are they afraid that once people know what they are serving then they won't buy it? Well too bad, that's just capitalism at work. It might encourage restaurants to make healthier options. Win win.0 -
Why would anyone say this is a bad thing? I didn't know this was happening I think it is awesome! They should also have to list ALL ingredients.
ETA: What is the rationale that this would be a burden on business? They are in the business of selling food, they should not be above regulations. I would actually like to go a step further and make this a national requirement for ALL restaurants (not just corporate chains). If you are selling something meant for human consumption you should be required to list all ingredients and nutritional information even if you are a "mom and pop" shop in backwater east-nowhere. Why should anyone be exempt, are they afraid that once people know what they are serving then they won't buy it? Well too bad, that's just capitalism at work. It might encourage restaurants to make healthier options. Win win.
Since you asked...
It costs money for businesses to print brochures, signs, etc. with calorie/nutriional information. It takes time for that information to be gathered and published (and time = money).
Not to mention, a retaurant's menu is not static. Things change. Menu items get added, dropped, and modified. Not to mention, suppliers can change frequently as well. If a restaurant gets its buns from Sunbeam this month, but next month switches to Bimbo, it has to redo all its calorie/nutritional info. That's more time and money.
And when the government forces businesses to do things, it's not "capitalism at work." It's bureaucracy at work. If businesses choose to publish nutritional data (as some already do), that's great. Potential customers can then make informed decisions. If they choose not to, potential customers can still make the decision whether or not to eat there. "That" is the free market at work: companies and customers making choices without undue interference.0 -
I think it's great! If places are worried about losing business over their ridiculously high-calorie foods, this may actually encourage them to do something to make things a little healthier. Foods don't *have* to be slathered in butter and fried to taste good!
^^THIS.
I think it's fantastic. I really feel like many people are severely under-educated in nutritional matters, and if this helps even some people make better choices while they are out, then it can only be a good thing. I know I have definitely made different choices when seeing the calorie counts on a menu or a chart.
And as far as it costing businesses time and money, it doesn't have to be that hard, really. It's something they should be doing, anyway, if they are actually serious about giving consumers a choice. All they need is ONE printed chart posted at the front of the restaurant, and one page on their website. It doesn't take all that much time to figure out what the calories in something is, all of us do it every damn day, so a change in ONE chart and on one website page is minimal compared to people not coming to their restaurant at all who would like to know this information but cannot find it, so choose somewhere else to go that does provide it. *shrug*0 -
Governing this is pretty much unenforceable. What, are there going to be undercover people taking food back to labs to check to be sure that the numbers are accurate? Bah ha ha.
1.) Too much of a burden on businesses.
2.) Restaurant food estimations are going to be off by hundreds of calories anyway...I worked at a restaurant, no two identical items are prepared identically....except maybe at McDs or similar cookie-cutter restaurants with strict protion control. If you're eating at those places more than a couple times a week, you're going to have worse problems than calorie accuracy. Just because you order something with "no oil" doesn't mean that is how you will get it....and you won't know the difference.
3.) Calorie counting is not that difficult, nor is it that exact. If you can't tell the difference between a fried chicken ceasar and a grilled chicken with dry veggies, you will never lose weight anyway.
We need to stop blaming everyone else for our over-eating. Spend a couple hours learning about which foods are lower calorie. Then take the responsiblity for what you put in your mouth.0 -
Since you asked...
It costs money for businesses to print brochures, signs, etc. with calorie/nutriional information. It takes time for that information to be gathered and published (and time = money).
Not to mention, a retaurant's menu is not static. Things change. Menu items get added, dropped, and modified. Not to mention, suppliers can change frequently as well. If a restaurant gets its buns from Sunbeam this month, but next month switches to Bimbo, it has to redo all its calorie/nutritional info. That's more time and money.
And when the government forces businesses to do things, it's not "capitalism at work." It's bureaucracy at work. If businesses choose to publish nutritional data (as some already do), that's great. Potential customers can then make informed decisions. If they choose not to, potential customers can still make the decision whether or not to eat there. "That" is the free market at work: companies and customers making choices without undue interference.
Very well said. This is just another example of our government trying to legislate everything. Fortunately as it's only large chains which have a more set menu and quantity of scale, and it's less likely to cause undue financial hardship since most of them were providing the information anyway. However, as an owner of a small food business, I can tell you it would be difficult. Very few items on my menu are static. Most are weekly specials and I don't follow exact recipes. I am more than happy to let a customer know what is in something if they have concerns, but being required to print and publish everything would be cumbersome.0 -
And when the government forces businesses to do things, it's not "capitalism at work." It's bureaucracy at work. If businesses choose to publish nutritional data (as some already do), that's great. Potential customers can then make informed decisions. If they choose not to, potential customers can still make the decision whether or not to eat there. "That" is the free market at work: companies and customers making choices without undue interference.
QFT
Bureaucracy doesn't help consumers *or* businesses. It simply justifies their existence collecting our tax money for a paycheck. This information is already available, by the demand of consumers, at most major chains. Making it a new regulation isn't going to have a huge impact on the supply side because consumers that care have already voted with their money.0 -
Governing this is pretty much unenforceable. What, are there going to be undercover people taking food back to labs to check to be sure that the numbers are accurate? Bah ha ha.
1.) Too much of a burden on businesses.
2.) Restaurant food estimations are going to be off by hundreds of calories anyway...I worked at a restaurant, no two identical items are prepared identically....except maybe at McDs or similar cookie-cutter restaurants with strict protion control. If you're eating at those places more than a couple times a week, you're going to have worse problems than calorie accuracy. Just because you order something with "no oil" doesn't mean that is how you will get it....and you won't know the difference.
3.) Calorie counting is not that difficult, nor is it that exact. If you can't tell the difference between a fried chicken ceasar and a grilled chicken with dry veggies, you will never lose weight anyway.
We need to stop blaming everyone else for our over-eating. Spend a couple hours learning about which foods are lower calorie. Then take the responsiblity for what you put in your mouth.
This too!0 -
It's the whole "you can lead a horse to water but can't make them drink" scenario going on here. We can blast information until we're blue in the face but people will continue to make bad decisions because they just don't care. There are those that will make good decisions because they are motivated to do so.
And if you read closely, it applies to businesses with more than 20 locations (at least according to the poster above) so your small businesses won't get totally screwed. Just sayin'.0 -
I am not sure I want to know...lol
It's just a fact that to make anything taste fabulous, the big three killers of sugar, salt and fat must be loaded into the dish.
Once I started researching the nutritional value of foods to eat out, it totally ruined my meals.
They're just terrible unless you get some loathsome salad or tasteless "heart healthy" item.
I am learning that for me I have traded a love for food with optimal health.
I can't indulge both.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 401 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 996 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions